A report, just issued by the Inspector General, about the review process used by the EPA in determining that “Six greenhouse gases taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations and greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas air pollution that endangers public health and welfare” found that the procedures were not up to standard.
It is important to note that the report is about the process used by the EPA to conclude that public health and welfare is endangered by greenhouse gasses, not about the validity of the conclusion. Yet, it is likely that the climate deniers will seize upon this opportunity to once again call for the demise of the EPA.
There is a bit of history leading up to this report being requested by a Senator. In October 1999, the EPA was petitioned to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. In 2003, the petition was denied by the EPA. The petitioner appealed the denial all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gasses are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act, and that the Administration should figure out if exhaust from vehicles contribute to air pollution and thus endanger the health of citizens.
The history of the U.S. studying climate change goes back even further to 1988, when the UN established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For those with tinfoil hats on their heads, just the mention of the UN is proof of a communist plot, further advancing my theory that this report will inspire new attacks on the EPA. In 2007, this Panel issued its fourth assessment, which was heavily relied upon by the EPA in the review process being evaluated. The panel is working on its fifth assessment, which will be available in parts starting in September 2013, and culminating in October 2014.
The process used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change involves scientific experts, relevant representatives of governments, and expert representatives from scientific organizations. Once a draft report is written, it is reviewed by governments. In the case of the US government and the most recent assesment, public comments were solicited through a Federal Register notice and 13 agencies and departments reviewed and consolidated the public comments before forwarding them to the Panel for inclusion in the assessment.
In 2010, the National Research Council issued a report, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, which concluded: “A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”
Bottom line: Scientific peer reviewed reports, both world-wide and national in scope, have concluded that climate change is occurring and that humans contribute to it. The EPA relied heavily on peer-reviewed, scientific studies in an internal process that only involved 12 scientists and one EPA representative. The Inspector General believes that the EPA did not implement all of their own rules during the internal review, which is the subject of the just released report. Nothing in the report does anything to change the conclusions drawn by international and national scientists in the reports they issued. None of which will make any difference to climate deniers.
Homework
Inspector General Report of EPA Review Process
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
National Research Council
It is important to note that the report is about the process used by the EPA to conclude that public health and welfare is endangered by greenhouse gasses, not about the validity of the conclusion. Yet, it is likely that the climate deniers will seize upon this opportunity to once again call for the demise of the EPA.
There is a bit of history leading up to this report being requested by a Senator. In October 1999, the EPA was petitioned to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. In 2003, the petition was denied by the EPA. The petitioner appealed the denial all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gasses are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act, and that the Administration should figure out if exhaust from vehicles contribute to air pollution and thus endanger the health of citizens.
The history of the U.S. studying climate change goes back even further to 1988, when the UN established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For those with tinfoil hats on their heads, just the mention of the UN is proof of a communist plot, further advancing my theory that this report will inspire new attacks on the EPA. In 2007, this Panel issued its fourth assessment, which was heavily relied upon by the EPA in the review process being evaluated. The panel is working on its fifth assessment, which will be available in parts starting in September 2013, and culminating in October 2014.
The process used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change involves scientific experts, relevant representatives of governments, and expert representatives from scientific organizations. Once a draft report is written, it is reviewed by governments. In the case of the US government and the most recent assesment, public comments were solicited through a Federal Register notice and 13 agencies and departments reviewed and consolidated the public comments before forwarding them to the Panel for inclusion in the assessment.
In 2010, the National Research Council issued a report, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, which concluded: “A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”
Bottom line: Scientific peer reviewed reports, both world-wide and national in scope, have concluded that climate change is occurring and that humans contribute to it. The EPA relied heavily on peer-reviewed, scientific studies in an internal process that only involved 12 scientists and one EPA representative. The Inspector General believes that the EPA did not implement all of their own rules during the internal review, which is the subject of the just released report. Nothing in the report does anything to change the conclusions drawn by international and national scientists in the reports they issued. None of which will make any difference to climate deniers.
Homework
Inspector General Report of EPA Review Process
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
National Research Council
RSS Feed